Audit of Bridgewater State University reveals financial management issues

Tuesday

Jun 10, 2014 at 10:58 PMJun 11, 2014 at 7:14 AM

An audit of Bridgewater State University by state Auditor Suzanne Bump’s office has revealed a number of issues at the university.

Staff Reporter

BRIDGEWATER – A report issued by state Auditor Suzanne Bump on Tuesday highlighted a number of deficiencies in the financial management of Bridgewater State University, which the school is now working to address.

The audit, which was conducted between July 1, 2010 and June 30, 2012, focused on a number of areas, including the university’s food services vendor, trust funds and inventory of equipment.

“People are always concerned about where is the greatest amount of risk,” said Lauren DeFilippo, a spokeswoman for Bump’s office.

By state law, Bump’s office must audit every agency in the state once every three years. Since taking office, Bump has taken a risk-based approach to auditing state agencies focusing on specific segments of an institution rather than auditing it all at once, DeFilippo said.

“Throughout the audit process, and with respect to each of the audit results detailed in the report, the university has cooperated fully with the State Auditor’s Office to both deeply understand the given recommendations and to take careful and timely action as necessary,” said Bryan Baldwin, a university spokesman.

During the audit, Bump’s office found that the university had awarded a contract for food services at the school to Sodexo Operations LLC without engaging in a competitive bidding process.

“Contrary to state policy and its own internal policies and procedures, since as far back as at least 1988, BSU has continued to award a contract noncompetitively to Sodexo for these services,” the report states.

The report also found that Bridgewater is not effectively monitoring Sodexo’s performance under the contract and, as a result, the university might not be receiving the best price and value for services.

However, DeFilippo said, the university’s handling of its food services contract is not unusual.

“It isn’t uncommon to find a contract being award without going out to competitive bid,” DeFilippo said.

Auditors also found that 43 of the university’s 59 trust funds had been established by members of the school’s administrative staff. However, state law and the university’s own policies identify the board of trustees as the sole body allowed to create trust funds at the school.

The report also stated that only 16 of the 59 trust funds contained defined requirements for the funds’ administration.

In addition to unclear requirements concerning the university’s trust funds, auditors also found discrepancies in the school’s financial records.

In 2012, the university overstated its “current” (less than 30 days outstanding) accounts-receivable balance by $21.9 million. In fiscal 2009 and 2011, auditors also found that the university did not submit required financial reports to the office of the state comptroller.

While reviewing the university’s inventory of equipment, auditors also found that the university had not conducted an inventory of its assets in recent years, and that the school had failed to report 16 instances of missing or stolen property to the state auditor’s office as required by law.

“Audits of this type present our large and dynamic organization with good opportunities to better internal controls, improve procedures and prioritize additional training needs for staff,” Baldwin said.

In the report, Bump’s office states that the university is working to address all of the issues uncovered during the audit.